PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Dec 18, 2019
This resolution sets forth the rule for consideration of H.Res. 755 (impeaching the President for high crimes and misdemeanors).
The resolution (1) designates certain individuals to be admitted to the Hall of the House of Representatives, during consideration of H.Res. 755; (2) after adoption of H.Res. 755, makes it in order to consider in the House a resolution appointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment trial, if offered by the chair of the House Committee on the Judiciary; and (3) prohibits any other resolution incidental to impeachment relating to H.Res. 755 from being privileged during the remainder of the 116th Congress.
The chair of the Committee on the Judiciary may insert in the Congressional Record, within five legislative days after its adoption, such materials as the chair may deem explanatory of (1) H.Res. 755, and (2) the resolution appointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment trial.
People & committees
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 228 - 197 (Roll no. 694). (text: CR H12115)
House roll call 694 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 228 - 197 (Roll no. 694).(text: CR H12115)
House roll call 694 · Individual votesOn ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 229 - 197 (Roll no. 693). (consideration: CR H12129-12130)
House roll call 693 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 767.
POINT OF ORDER - Mr. Scalise rose to raise a point of order against H.Res. 767 on the ground that the report accompanying the resolution fails to specify the waiver of a particular point of order, and is thus in violation of clause 6(g) of rule 13. The Chair advised the gentleman that he was not stating a proper point of order.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H12115-12130)
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 63.
The question of adoption of the resolution, as amended shall be divided between the two articles. The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted After adoption of H. Res. 755, it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House a resolution appointing and authorizing managers for the impeachment trial if offered by the chair of the Committee on the Judiciary or his designee.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-355, by Mr. McGovern.
The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 116-355, by Mr. McGovern.
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.Res.767 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.Res.767 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.Res.767 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.Res.767 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.